Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test

Asthma diagnosis can be confirmed by observing significant bronchodilator response (BDR) through peak expiratory flow (PEF) at home or forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) via spirometry in a clinical setting. We aimed to use the administration of salbutamol after a methacholine challenge test as...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Leon L. Csonka, Antti Tikkakoski, Liisa Vuotari, Jussi Karjalainen, Lauri Lehtimäki
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-01-01
Series:Pulmonary Medicine
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/pm/7675935
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849718124135317504
author Leon L. Csonka
Antti Tikkakoski
Liisa Vuotari
Jussi Karjalainen
Lauri Lehtimäki
author_facet Leon L. Csonka
Antti Tikkakoski
Liisa Vuotari
Jussi Karjalainen
Lauri Lehtimäki
author_sort Leon L. Csonka
collection DOAJ
description Asthma diagnosis can be confirmed by observing significant bronchodilator response (BDR) through peak expiratory flow (PEF) at home or forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) via spirometry in a clinical setting. We aimed to use the administration of salbutamol after a methacholine challenge test as a model of bronchodilation to study how accurately the change in PEF predicts improvement in lung function, as defined by an increase in FEV1. We analyzed 869 adult patients who were administered salbutamol after a methacholine challenge. To compare relative changes in PEF and FEV1 during bronchodilation, we used regression analysis and constructed a Bland and Altman plot. ROC analysis, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and kappa coefficient assessed how precisely increases in PEF detected a 12% and 0.2-L improvement in FEV1. The average relative increase in FEV1 was significantly greater than that in PEF. The area under the curve in the ROC analysis was 0.844 for PEF change to detect a 12% and 0.2-L increase in FEV1. The kappa values for changes in PEF and FEV1 ranged from fair to moderate. BDR detected by the recommended 15% and 60 L/min cut-off for PEF identified less than half of true positives, while a 10% cut-off correctly identified close to 75% of them. PEF increase is not a reliable measure of BDR in comparison to FEV1 increase, and a 10% improvement in PEF was the least inaccurate cut-off. Substituting the PEF meter with a handheld spirometer should be further investigated for asthma home monitoring.
format Article
id doaj-art-0e868b23d5c94b33b14cdf2652eb5af6
institution DOAJ
issn 2090-1844
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Pulmonary Medicine
spelling doaj-art-0e868b23d5c94b33b14cdf2652eb5af62025-08-20T03:12:27ZengWileyPulmonary Medicine2090-18442025-01-01202510.1155/pm/7675935Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge TestLeon L. Csonka0Antti Tikkakoski1Liisa Vuotari2Jussi Karjalainen3Lauri Lehtimäki4Faculty of Medicine and Health TechnologyDepartment of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear MedicineDepartment of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear MedicineFaculty of Medicine and Health TechnologyFaculty of Medicine and Health TechnologyAsthma diagnosis can be confirmed by observing significant bronchodilator response (BDR) through peak expiratory flow (PEF) at home or forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) via spirometry in a clinical setting. We aimed to use the administration of salbutamol after a methacholine challenge test as a model of bronchodilation to study how accurately the change in PEF predicts improvement in lung function, as defined by an increase in FEV1. We analyzed 869 adult patients who were administered salbutamol after a methacholine challenge. To compare relative changes in PEF and FEV1 during bronchodilation, we used regression analysis and constructed a Bland and Altman plot. ROC analysis, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and kappa coefficient assessed how precisely increases in PEF detected a 12% and 0.2-L improvement in FEV1. The average relative increase in FEV1 was significantly greater than that in PEF. The area under the curve in the ROC analysis was 0.844 for PEF change to detect a 12% and 0.2-L increase in FEV1. The kappa values for changes in PEF and FEV1 ranged from fair to moderate. BDR detected by the recommended 15% and 60 L/min cut-off for PEF identified less than half of true positives, while a 10% cut-off correctly identified close to 75% of them. PEF increase is not a reliable measure of BDR in comparison to FEV1 increase, and a 10% improvement in PEF was the least inaccurate cut-off. Substituting the PEF meter with a handheld spirometer should be further investigated for asthma home monitoring.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/pm/7675935
spellingShingle Leon L. Csonka
Antti Tikkakoski
Liisa Vuotari
Jussi Karjalainen
Lauri Lehtimäki
Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
Pulmonary Medicine
title Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
title_full Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
title_fullStr Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
title_full_unstemmed Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
title_short Relation of Changes in PEF and FEV1 During Salbutamol-Induced Bronchodilation After Methacholine Challenge Test
title_sort relation of changes in pef and fev1 during salbutamol induced bronchodilation after methacholine challenge test
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/pm/7675935
work_keys_str_mv AT leonlcsonka relationofchangesinpefandfev1duringsalbutamolinducedbronchodilationaftermethacholinechallengetest
AT anttitikkakoski relationofchangesinpefandfev1duringsalbutamolinducedbronchodilationaftermethacholinechallengetest
AT liisavuotari relationofchangesinpefandfev1duringsalbutamolinducedbronchodilationaftermethacholinechallengetest
AT jussikarjalainen relationofchangesinpefandfev1duringsalbutamolinducedbronchodilationaftermethacholinechallengetest
AT laurilehtimaki relationofchangesinpefandfev1duringsalbutamolinducedbronchodilationaftermethacholinechallengetest